Case 4110640/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Steele v Represented by: Mr J Lee Solicitor EDF Energy Nuclear Generation Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 4110640/2021
- Decision date
- 19 October 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge A Kemp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Steele
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing on the claimant's application dated 30 September 2021 to amend her Tribunal claim against EDF Energy Nuclear Generation Ltd. The original claim form, presented after early conciliation on 3 August 2021, referred to disability discrimination under sections 13, 19, 20, 21 and 26 of the Equality Act 2010 and to a PCP said to limit part-time working to employees nearing retirement. The respondent opposed the amendment.
The claimant sought to add age discrimination claims and to provide further factual detail. The tribunal applied the Selkent approach and the wider overriding objective, balancing the hardship of allowing or refusing the amendment. It found a strong causative link between the original pleading and the proposed age claim, particularly because the original paperwork referred to retiring employees, and it treated the extra factual material as an extension of the existing case rather than a wholly new one.
On time limits and jurisdiction, the tribunal accepted that whether the alleged acts amounted to conduct extending over a period was disputed and could properly be decided after evidence. Following the Galilee line of authority, it granted the amendment but reserved the jurisdiction question, including any time-bar issue, for later determination. No merits finding was made on the discrimination allegations and no remedy was awarded at this stage.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal did not decide the merits of the disability discrimination claims; it allowed the claimant to add further factual detail to the existing disability-based pleading as part of the amendment application. | Other | Disability | — |
| Age discrimination | The tribunal granted the application to amend so that age discrimination claims under sections 13, 19 and 26 Equality Act 2010 could be pursued, but it reserved the question of jurisdiction and any time-bar issue for later determination. | Other | Age | — |
Legal tests applied
8 references- Selkent principles
- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- Galilee v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
- Barclays Bank plc v Kapur
- Hendricks v Metropolitan Police Commissioner
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre
- Abercrombie v Aga Rangemaster Ltd
- Housing Corporation v Bryant
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.